I hate to say this, but the online world needs lawyers. I read where a fellow poster commented that this is supposed to be human-human interraction with the accompanying mores; but that the game does little to discourage anti-social behavior.
So, what you do is set up a jury system. You suspect somebody of botting, then charges are raised, assets are frozen, and a short trial is held--online. Found innocent, then perhaps retribution v. the original claimant. Guilty, then assets are stripped (perhaps redistributed to those in the court).
The present system bans users. That should not be a big deal to a dedicated exploiter. They will just set up a new account. Put a sting on them via a court system, then there'll be a penalty paid.
The problem is, you're reproducing the real world; with all the evil (lawyers) that accompany.
Who modded parent Informative? "Guilty until proven innocent in _criminal_ cases." WTF?! That's bass-ackwards. It's "innocent until proven guilty."
As far as suing anybody for anything, that's only partly true. Lawyers can be (figuratively) tarred an feathered for initiating a suit they know to be wrong. So, you may want to sue, but lawyers tend to have to perform a little CYA first.
What has worked for me in the past is to go ahead and impliment something for myself. Then, I start adding everything I can think of. After a decent framework is in place, I approach one or two others, and coerce them into giving it a try. Eventually, word of mouth takes hold. Then I just sit back and administer.
An out-of-the-box solution would be something like PmWiki (http://www.pmwiki.org) as it can be installed in minutes and comes with most of the documentation to make it worth using.
Well, I doubt the interview as we see it was the entire interview. The editors quite probably edited for content and perhaps for bias. So, while it would seem to be off-topic, maybe the interview went off in a direction not quite so apparent from the portion of the transcript we were allowed to see.
And, assuming this was a skilled interviewer, when Gates went off-topic, then why didn't he be brought back.
What I think is exceptional is how Gates spins technology that on one hand could help protect patient records, but in another could quash open-source (by denying installation of Linux--or so I heard).
" And at the same time the amount of energy put out by the Sun is increasing."
That's because the Sun sees that the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface is less than before. He is mighty pissed off that we upstarts think we can dim his star when he just recently got on stage.
How can he tell? Well, I myself have noticed that I've had a harder time tanning over the past couple of decades. I can only assume that the Sun is looking at me when I go outside and based on how little tan I have knows to up his output.
Not that I have delusions of grandure. I know that I have an impact on solar radiation.
What I meant by seven years-old is twofold. First, younger than that age kids should be developing their motor skills, so I wouldn't encourage them to be couch/computer potatoes. Second, although children begin to learn to read younger than seven, there's a certain degree of foundational literacy that they won't pick up until around seven.
I don't think you could argue that a five year-old will have grasped sufficient literacy to surf the web. That's what I'm driving at.
Having a teenager, I may have some insight. I don't think computers are an advantage until the child can read, so before seven is probably too early. Sure, there are some neat games, but at that age they should be doing more physical play to develop their physical skills.
After he starts reading, then it's okay to introduce them; have him ride shotgun with you while you surf. It's sort of like watching parents when they drive. The child picks up the rules of the road. Let him guide you to surf things he's interested in.
Eventually, get him a typing tutor game and teach him to type, well before his school would.
Naturally, don't push him in any direction, but if he shows interest guide him to do better. My son is very Internet fluent, without much more than routine exposure. He's not a computer geek (yet), but he's literate.
I think that sometimes as parents we try to make our kids the best at everything, which puts a lot of pressure on them and our relationships. In general I follow two strategies. First, you don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster than the slowest camper (i.e., give him what he needs to be better than average). Second, teach him to put forth a solid effort in everything he does. If he has a natural gift, help it.
Anyway, the trash man has told me to get off the soap box because he as to toss it on the truck.
If you look at the hierarchy, you'll see that Perl dropped by 2.14 percent. Python rose by 1.7 percent. This is not a perfect mirror, but it does hint that Python may be sapping a bit of Perl's strength. However, it is just as likely that some of PHP's gains were also at Perl's expense.
What's weak about my analysis is it assumes that a developer only showcases one skill, which is not the case. That is, this needn't be a zero-sum game.
Although, I speculate some of the Perl decline is due to PHP's ascendency in the web world and some is due to the Perl6 due to come out. All I read keeps promising that Perl is making a radical change. As a former Perl developer, I know that affects my decision on what language I'll focus on learning in the future.
First, I would say the market is full. Web Designers, unless they are very artistic, are low man on the totem pole. IMO, to say "when I grow up I want to be a web designer" for a teenager today is about like saying, "when I grow up, I wanna drive a UPS truck." That's why the other fellow's humor about flipping burgers is funny, sad, but true. You need to think more long term. Also, beware of the wave of out-sourcing
Go to college, and at least get a Business minor. Most of the technologies that are needed for web development are self-teachable, so (again, IMO), if you want to go into computers you may not needa a CompSci degree. Many organizations look for somebody who is technical, but who understands their industry--hence the business minor advice. By that, I mean, you'll understand a bit more about business. However, a business minor (or degree) is really generic.
I used to do IT, now I'm in law school. I don't necessarily plan to be a lawyer--I presently am inclined to return to IT. Having an advanced degree in an industry also helps your job potential.
When it comes to which languages to learn, HTML is too easy to learn to be mentioned--just follow the advice of others on this list and learn HTML properly, not like the WYSIWYG editors might teach. I'd recommend PHP, Perl, Python, all three. I'd also recommend a systems language (Java, C, C++), Mysql is prefect because it helps you learn the fundamentals of databases at a low cost (free).
Depending on where in the country your are, though, you may have to submit yourself to Mr. Bill. In my local market (I moved from where I did IT), Unix skills aren't as marketable as MS skills.
Anyway, a lot of service IT can be self-taught. So, educationally focusing on something else is good for balance. Business helps you communicate to the business types. Other degrees to other specialties. An advanced degree also helps as well as increasing salary potential.
Just in time for the latest Wonder Woman movie. With Star Trek's transparent aluminum and these new-fangled transparent circuits, she can finally go solid state.
I would suppose the provider would complain the the PUC, and perhaps subsequently file a law suit. That sort of "dirty trick" behavior of a carrier is not unique, and more than likely has a ready legal remedy that would be most painful to the utility.
You failed to notice my humor. I know all about *nix security issues. I was saying that they should fail for even trying to find security holes--not that they don't exist but that they should be punished for trying. Very dry humor, to be certain.
Hey! I'm a law student. Okay, this is my third career change. Here's one funny for you. A law student at my school (last year) went to the IT guys for help because her laptop was running slow. When they investigated they found that it had been turned into an itenerat porn server and had more computer contageous diseases to embarrass a NY corner "vendor."
The problems occur when you have unsavvy users. I've had this laptop for over a year and narray a virus or anything else--but when it comes to security I'm a belt and suspenders guy. I also dual boot Linux when I can.:-)
When do I RTFM? I'd say the informal rule I use is 1) when what I'm getting into is unlike anything I've done before and the cost (typically) of failure is catastrophic, or 2) if I'm really stuck.
What's a good example of the first? I'm not sure, since I don't typically read the manual. I would suppose when I installed Gentoo the first couple of times I read the manual. Now, I just use a checklist. Originally, building a system like that was totally unfamiliar and I was really stuck.
When I was a kid, and computers were made of rocks and bits of straw, I tended to have access to games that didn't have manuals. So, I had to learn how the interface worked literally by pressing every key. It was more fun that way.
I agree with the comment of another. Modern consumer electronics should be intuitive enough not to require a complex manual, or there should be an "idiot" option that takes the consumer by the hand and drags them through the process and tells them what every little thing does. Sort of like tutorial mode on CivII.
I been uzed mi kompuder al mi lives, an I an' got no phroblem wit edukashun, dat articul is ful of carp. Gimme free more kumpudrs, an' geenyus wil I bee.
No, I was referring to Philly. I agree that there is rampant vote tampering throughout this country. If you think of it, back in the birth of our nation there was the same trend. When we studied Edgar Allen Poe, there was an emphasis on how there would be poll gangs: people who would travel from one polling place to another to vote.
Then, there's the old machine politics. Let's face it, the issues we're facing now in terms of voter fraud are nothing new in this country. However, I think the trend to increase the time for voting and easing the means of registering make fraud more possible.
A good example of that is the Ukraine and Russian elections. It is said that Putin is seeking to quash democracy in Russia (and wanting to regain control over the Ukraine). On tactic used in that is provisional ballots. I'm sorry that I don't have more to back that up. I read a story about this and filed it away in my mind only.
What's funny about this is I once dated a woman until we got into an argument about voter fraud. She said that voter fraud was impossible in the US. (She also hated that I was always able to out-debate her and that I was always right.) That was 1999.:-)
" . . . you've just accused me of being a dishonest charlatan."
Individuals are intelligent, but people are stupid. Or, something to that effect. You're accusing the parent of personally accusing you, and you become emotional. He was not attacking you, but a profession. Within a group of people, you may have individuals who are of quality amongst a sea of others. To take my leading sentence into context, individuals are credible, the science community is dubious.
The parent is right to a certain extent. There are some who do what it takes to make themselves look more important than they are. Typical human nature--to think of ourselves higher than we ought. You would think that Science with its emphasis on how trival man is in contrast to our Universe would have made man more humble. Yet, the reverse seems more true.
There are so many studys out that show that environmental conditions are attributed to the Earth itself and its environs (i.e. Sol). IIRC, there was a study on/. recently that showed that the Solar output has been on a spike for the past few centuries. I wonder if the fact that a giant fusion ball nearby wouldn't contribute to Earth getting hotter?
Anyway, don't take personally when somebody attacks your profession. Hell, I'm in law school now. If I took personal offense everytime somebody attacked that profession, then I'd be a seething ball of hatred looking for ambulances to chase.
It would increase the chances of voter fraud and ballot stuffing. This last election showed how easy that is. One case as an example. One polling place had lever machines already having 1500 votes tallied when the poll workers showed up in the morning. They were told not to worry about it.
First, get politics for dummies. Also, you don't need root, as has been said ad nausium. The fact that you are asking if you need root to be a full fledged web master demonstrates that you don't know what you're in for politically or technically. Odds are your admin is reading this thread and will know its you.
However, I'll give you the loaded gun. Go ye therefore . ..
1. Don't rock any boats for 90 days. You need this time to assess the political landscape and get to know who is really in control. You may find that the man in charge is not the man in control. If you start rocking your boat early, the man behind the curtain will be wise to you. IF that man is the sys admin you're trying to sweep the legs out from under, then clean up your resume.
2. Get to know the system you're wanting to control. You need to know why you need root to ask for it. Needing to install software is usually the best excuse since routine permissions will fix any routine need for root. This also requires some major server overall that you *need* to get the website to some grand plan you have. You do have a grand plan, right?
3. After the requisite time period (see 1), start making a lot of important installation requests staggared. Make sure you ask for it when he's swamped. That way he will seem unsupportive/inept. Don't forget to explain to man in control that you're not being supported.
4. Explain to the man in control that if sysadmin would only give you root, you could take care of this on your own. Don't forget to wave your hand in front of the man in control or the jedi mind trick will fail. Hope that man in control and sysadmin are not friends.
5. Hope that sysadmin is not politically savvy. If he is, prepare your resume. You have about a 25 percent chance of winning if you know what you're doing, and a 100 percent chance of pissing off your sysadmin.
If he's worth his salt, once you have effectively stolen root from him, the server will have mysterious problems arise that can *only* have been because he was forced to give you root. Root will be taken from you and you will have a) made a serious enemy and b) "proven" your incompetence.
The net result is that you will have weakened the organization as a whole.
Alternatively, you can work your ass off for several months to impress the hell out of all involved and show that you can be trusted with root. No politics required.
Except, we are getting ready to cycle to the next congress. As I understand it, when we go to the next congress (a two-year period of time), all bills of the previous congress are dropped and must be reintroduced anew. So, if she just now started the process, and they adjurn this congress, it's a moot issue. This has to get through both houses and through the President in less than a month.
I see your point, and it is quite valid. However, I would contend that people who tend to abuse substances remain to blame because they chose the behavior. I drink, yet have never gotten behind the wheel of a car while intoxicated, which is a reasonable behavior. From a legal perspective, the person who drinks and drives failes a reasonable person standard and is therefore negligent. There are also statutes that underscore that negligence.
However, courts also have a strict liability standard for when the risk is serious enough to hold one liable regardless of their reasonable behavior. If you accidently shoot somebody deer hunting, you may not be negligent, but you could still be strictly liable because of the potential lethality. (Conversely, driving a car carries an obviously high risk, but because of the social utility it does not carry strict liability.)
I suppose criminality of "victimless crimes" is a social cost issue. What if everybody smoked pot? What is the effect on society as a whole? I opine it would carry a significant social burden to include medical costs (e.g. tobacco use), but also in lost productivity.
Some drugs are illegal because of their overwhelming addictivity and negative impact on the user (e.g. crack). Decriminalizing drugs may reduce the cost per use, but I opine the total cost to society would still be significantly higher.
Which brings me to a point I raised near the top of this tread: there are no victimless crimes. There is an aggregate social cost that exceeds the benefit conferred by the practice. This may be true for several other currently accepted practices. However, just because one item is not criminalized does not mean a like thing should not be. Our society has spoken by illegalizing it--albeit in the legislature.
There are some laws that protect a class of people. Statutory rape involves sex between a minor and an adult, even consentual. Legally, one cannot consent when you belong to a protected class. Why is sex with a minor illegal? Likely because of the lack of maturity of the protected class. Perhaps "victimless" crimes protect a larger class of victims?
The problem comes when we imprison users. The social cost there is quite high due to incarceration and the impact on the user and family. But, because it is illegal, we cannot determine the total social cost in the US. I opine that any study is de facto speculative. But, I'm more inclined to a significantly more aggressive campaign to erradicate the producer and supply line with extreme prejudice.
But, more importantly, I like that my first post that led to this discussion was cited as flamebait--on a political discussion. I responded to what I would personally characterize as flamebait, yet it holds a high insightful rating now. I figure that is because I don't hold the view that illegal substances should be legalized.
No, I'm sorry. I don't see dope smoking as a victimless crime. Society is a victim. Self is a victim.
Same goes for tobacco use. Sure, it is not a crime because it had been a staple of our society for so long. However, municipalities et al. are doing what they can to restrict its consumption such that they can eradicate its use. They want it to be a crime. Why? Because the society costs are so high in terms of health expenses, etc.
Personally, I like the idea of returning felony to its original meaning.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I hate to say this, but the online world needs lawyers. I read where a fellow poster commented that this is supposed to be human-human interraction with the accompanying mores; but that the game does little to discourage anti-social behavior.
So, what you do is set up a jury system. You suspect somebody of botting, then charges are raised, assets are frozen, and a short trial is held--online. Found innocent, then perhaps retribution v. the original claimant. Guilty, then assets are stripped (perhaps redistributed to those in the court).
The present system bans users. That should not be a big deal to a dedicated exploiter. They will just set up a new account. Put a sting on them via a court system, then there'll be a penalty paid.
The problem is, you're reproducing the real world; with all the evil (lawyers) that accompany.
But, then, there's always the Lexicon Game or Sample Lexicon Game
Who modded parent Informative? "Guilty until proven innocent in _criminal_ cases." WTF?! That's bass-ackwards. It's "innocent until proven guilty."
As far as suing anybody for anything, that's only partly true. Lawyers can be (figuratively) tarred an feathered for initiating a suit they know to be wrong. So, you may want to sue, but lawyers tend to have to perform a little CYA first.
What I really need is a programmer who understands the binary language of XSL . . .
. . . XSL?! Sir, my first job was programming XML, very similar to your XSL in most respects.
Do you program Perl?
Of course I do, sir, I must type some for you.
Alright, shut up. --He'll do. Luke! Take these two programmers and get them cleaned up.
What has worked for me in the past is to go ahead and impliment something for myself. Then, I start adding everything I can think of. After a decent framework is in place, I approach one or two others, and coerce them into giving it a try. Eventually, word of mouth takes hold. Then I just sit back and administer.
An out-of-the-box solution would be something like PmWiki (http://www.pmwiki.org) as it can be installed in minutes and comes with most of the documentation to make it worth using.
Well, I doubt the interview as we see it was the entire interview. The editors quite probably edited for content and perhaps for bias. So, while it would seem to be off-topic, maybe the interview went off in a direction not quite so apparent from the portion of the transcript we were allowed to see.
And, assuming this was a skilled interviewer, when Gates went off-topic, then why didn't he be brought back.
What I think is exceptional is how Gates spins technology that on one hand could help protect patient records, but in another could quash open-source (by denying installation of Linux--or so I heard).
" And at the same time the amount of energy put out by the Sun is increasing."
That's because the Sun sees that the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface is less than before. He is mighty pissed off that we upstarts think we can dim his star when he just recently got on stage.
How can he tell? Well, I myself have noticed that I've had a harder time tanning over the past couple of decades. I can only assume that the Sun is looking at me when I go outside and based on how little tan I have knows to up his output.
Not that I have delusions of grandure. I know that I have an impact on solar radiation.
What I meant by seven years-old is twofold. First, younger than that age kids should be developing their motor skills, so I wouldn't encourage them to be couch/computer potatoes. Second, although children begin to learn to read younger than seven, there's a certain degree of foundational literacy that they won't pick up until around seven.
I don't think you could argue that a five year-old will have grasped sufficient literacy to surf the web. That's what I'm driving at.
Having a teenager, I may have some insight. I don't think computers are an advantage until the child can read, so before seven is probably too early. Sure, there are some neat games, but at that age they should be doing more physical play to develop their physical skills.
After he starts reading, then it's okay to introduce them; have him ride shotgun with you while you surf. It's sort of like watching parents when they drive. The child picks up the rules of the road. Let him guide you to surf things he's interested in.
Eventually, get him a typing tutor game and teach him to type, well before his school would.
Naturally, don't push him in any direction, but if he shows interest guide him to do better. My son is very Internet fluent, without much more than routine exposure. He's not a computer geek (yet), but he's literate.
I think that sometimes as parents we try to make our kids the best at everything, which puts a lot of pressure on them and our relationships. In general I follow two strategies. First, you don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster than the slowest camper (i.e., give him what he needs to be better than average). Second, teach him to put forth a solid effort in everything he does. If he has a natural gift, help it.
Anyway, the trash man has told me to get off the soap box because he as to toss it on the truck.
If you look at the hierarchy, you'll see that Perl dropped by 2.14 percent. Python rose by 1.7 percent. This is not a perfect mirror, but it does hint that Python may be sapping a bit of Perl's strength. However, it is just as likely that some of PHP's gains were also at Perl's expense.
What's weak about my analysis is it assumes that a developer only showcases one skill, which is not the case. That is, this needn't be a zero-sum game.
Although, I speculate some of the Perl decline is due to PHP's ascendency in the web world and some is due to the Perl6 due to come out. All I read keeps promising that Perl is making a radical change. As a former Perl developer, I know that affects my decision on what language I'll focus on learning in the future.
First, I would say the market is full. Web Designers, unless they are very artistic, are low man on the totem pole. IMO, to say "when I grow up I want to be a web designer" for a teenager today is about like saying, "when I grow up, I wanna drive a UPS truck." That's why the other fellow's humor about flipping burgers is funny, sad, but true. You need to think more long term. Also, beware of the wave of out-sourcing
Go to college, and at least get a Business minor. Most of the technologies that are needed for web development are self-teachable, so (again, IMO), if you want to go into computers you may not needa a CompSci degree. Many organizations look for somebody who is technical, but who understands their industry--hence the business minor advice. By that, I mean, you'll understand a bit more about business. However, a business minor (or degree) is really generic.
I used to do IT, now I'm in law school. I don't necessarily plan to be a lawyer--I presently am inclined to return to IT. Having an advanced degree in an industry also helps your job potential.
When it comes to which languages to learn, HTML is too easy to learn to be mentioned--just follow the advice of others on this list and learn HTML properly, not like the WYSIWYG editors might teach. I'd recommend PHP, Perl, Python, all three. I'd also recommend a systems language (Java, C, C++), Mysql is prefect because it helps you learn the fundamentals of databases at a low cost (free).
Depending on where in the country your are, though, you may have to submit yourself to Mr. Bill. In my local market (I moved from where I did IT), Unix skills aren't as marketable as MS skills.
Anyway, a lot of service IT can be self-taught. So, educationally focusing on something else is good for balance. Business helps you communicate to the business types. Other degrees to other specialties. An advanced degree also helps as well as increasing salary potential.
Finally, Be Flexible.
Just in time for the latest Wonder Woman movie. With Star Trek's transparent aluminum and these new-fangled transparent circuits, she can finally go solid state.
I would suppose the provider would complain the the PUC, and perhaps subsequently file a law suit. That sort of "dirty trick" behavior of a carrier is not unique, and more than likely has a ready legal remedy that would be most painful to the utility.
You failed to notice my humor. I know all about *nix security issues. I was saying that they should fail for even trying to find security holes--not that they don't exist but that they should be punished for trying. Very dry humor, to be certain.
Hey! I'm a law student. Okay, this is my third career change. Here's one funny for you. A law student at my school (last year) went to the IT guys for help because her laptop was running slow. When they investigated they found that it had been turned into an itenerat porn server and had more computer contageous diseases to embarrass a NY corner "vendor."
:-)
The problems occur when you have unsavvy users. I've had this laptop for over a year and narray a virus or anything else--but when it comes to security I'm a belt and suspenders guy. I also dual boot Linux when I can.
When do I RTFM? I'd say the informal rule I use is 1) when what I'm getting into is unlike anything I've done before and the cost (typically) of failure is catastrophic, or 2) if I'm really stuck.
What's a good example of the first? I'm not sure, since I don't typically read the manual. I would suppose when I installed Gentoo the first couple of times I read the manual. Now, I just use a checklist. Originally, building a system like that was totally unfamiliar and I was really stuck.
When I was a kid, and computers were made of rocks and bits of straw, I tended to have access to games that didn't have manuals. So, I had to learn how the interface worked literally by pressing every key. It was more fun that way.
I agree with the comment of another. Modern consumer electronics should be intuitive enough not to require a complex manual, or there should be an "idiot" option that takes the consumer by the hand and drags them through the process and tells them what every little thing does. Sort of like tutorial mode on CivII.
It serves them right. They should fail for trying to find security holes in *nix-based software! :-)
I been uzed mi kompuder al mi lives, an I an' got no phroblem wit edukashun, dat articul is ful of carp. Gimme free more kumpudrs, an' geenyus wil I bee.
No, I was referring to Philly. I agree that there is rampant vote tampering throughout this country. If you think of it, back in the birth of our nation there was the same trend. When we studied Edgar Allen Poe, there was an emphasis on how there would be poll gangs: people who would travel from one polling place to another to vote.
:-)
Then, there's the old machine politics. Let's face it, the issues we're facing now in terms of voter fraud are nothing new in this country. However, I think the trend to increase the time for voting and easing the means of registering make fraud more possible.
A good example of that is the Ukraine and Russian elections. It is said that Putin is seeking to quash democracy in Russia (and wanting to regain control over the Ukraine). On tactic used in that is provisional ballots. I'm sorry that I don't have more to back that up. I read a story about this and filed it away in my mind only.
What's funny about this is I once dated a woman until we got into an argument about voter fraud. She said that voter fraud was impossible in the US. (She also hated that I was always able to out-debate her and that I was always right.) That was 1999.
" . . . you've just accused me of being a dishonest charlatan."
/. recently that showed that the Solar output has been on a spike for the past few centuries. I wonder if the fact that a giant fusion ball nearby wouldn't contribute to Earth getting hotter?
Individuals are intelligent, but people are stupid. Or, something to that effect. You're accusing the parent of personally accusing you, and you become emotional. He was not attacking you, but a profession. Within a group of people, you may have individuals who are of quality amongst a sea of others. To take my leading sentence into context, individuals are credible, the science community is dubious.
The parent is right to a certain extent. There are some who do what it takes to make themselves look more important than they are. Typical human nature--to think of ourselves higher than we ought. You would think that Science with its emphasis on how trival man is in contrast to our Universe would have made man more humble. Yet, the reverse seems more true.
There are so many studys out that show that environmental conditions are attributed to the Earth itself and its environs (i.e. Sol). IIRC, there was a study on
Anyway, don't take personally when somebody attacks your profession. Hell, I'm in law school now. If I took personal offense everytime somebody attacked that profession, then I'd be a seething ball of hatred looking for ambulances to chase.
It would increase the chances of voter fraud and ballot stuffing. This last election showed how easy that is. One case as an example. One polling place had lever machines already having 1500 votes tallied when the poll workers showed up in the morning. They were told not to worry about it.
First, get politics for dummies. Also, you don't need root, as has been said ad nausium. The fact that you are asking if you need root to be a full fledged web master demonstrates that you don't know what you're in for politically or technically. Odds are your admin is reading this thread and will know its you.
.
However, I'll give you the loaded gun. Go ye therefore . .
1. Don't rock any boats for 90 days. You need this time to assess the political landscape and get to know who is really in control. You may find that the man in charge is not the man in control. If you start rocking your boat early, the man behind the curtain will be wise to you. IF that man is the sys admin you're trying to sweep the legs out from under, then clean up your resume.
2. Get to know the system you're wanting to control. You need to know why you need root to ask for it. Needing to install software is usually the best excuse since routine permissions will fix any routine need for root. This also requires some major server overall that you *need* to get the website to some grand plan you have. You do have a grand plan, right?
3. After the requisite time period (see 1), start making a lot of important installation requests staggared. Make sure you ask for it when he's swamped. That way he will seem unsupportive/inept. Don't forget to explain to man in control that you're not being supported.
4. Explain to the man in control that if sysadmin would only give you root, you could take care of this on your own. Don't forget to wave your hand in front of the man in control or the jedi mind trick will fail. Hope that man in control and sysadmin are not friends.
5. Hope that sysadmin is not politically savvy. If he is, prepare your resume. You have about a 25 percent chance of winning if you know what you're doing, and a 100 percent chance of pissing off your sysadmin.
If he's worth his salt, once you have effectively stolen root from him, the server will have mysterious problems arise that can *only* have been because he was forced to give you root. Root will be taken from you and you will have a) made a serious enemy and b) "proven" your incompetence.
The net result is that you will have weakened the organization as a whole.
Alternatively, you can work your ass off for several months to impress the hell out of all involved and show that you can be trusted with root. No politics required.
Except, we are getting ready to cycle to the next congress. As I understand it, when we go to the next congress (a two-year period of time), all bills of the previous congress are dropped and must be reintroduced anew. So, if she just now started the process, and they adjurn this congress, it's a moot issue. This has to get through both houses and through the President in less than a month.
I see your point, and it is quite valid. However, I would contend that people who tend to abuse substances remain to blame because they chose the behavior. I drink, yet have never gotten behind the wheel of a car while intoxicated, which is a reasonable behavior. From a legal perspective, the person who drinks and drives failes a reasonable person standard and is therefore negligent. There are also statutes that underscore that negligence.
However, courts also have a strict liability standard for when the risk is serious enough to hold one liable regardless of their reasonable behavior. If you accidently shoot somebody deer hunting, you may not be negligent, but you could still be strictly liable because of the potential lethality. (Conversely, driving a car carries an obviously high risk, but because of the social utility it does not carry strict liability.)
I suppose criminality of "victimless crimes" is a social cost issue. What if everybody smoked pot? What is the effect on society as a whole? I opine it would carry a significant social burden to include medical costs (e.g. tobacco use), but also in lost productivity.
Some drugs are illegal because of their overwhelming addictivity and negative impact on the user (e.g. crack). Decriminalizing drugs may reduce the cost per use, but I opine the total cost to society would still be significantly higher.
Which brings me to a point I raised near the top of this tread: there are no victimless crimes. There is an aggregate social cost that exceeds the benefit conferred by the practice. This may be true for several other currently accepted practices. However, just because one item is not criminalized does not mean a like thing should not be. Our society has spoken by illegalizing it--albeit in the legislature.
There are some laws that protect a class of people. Statutory rape involves sex between a minor and an adult, even consentual. Legally, one cannot consent when you belong to a protected class. Why is sex with a minor illegal? Likely because of the lack of maturity of the protected class. Perhaps "victimless" crimes protect a larger class of victims?
The problem comes when we imprison users. The social cost there is quite high due to incarceration and the impact on the user and family. But, because it is illegal, we cannot determine the total social cost in the US. I opine that any study is de facto speculative. But, I'm more inclined to a significantly more aggressive campaign to erradicate the producer and supply line with extreme prejudice.
But, more importantly, I like that my first post that led to this discussion was cited as flamebait--on a political discussion. I responded to what I would personally characterize as flamebait, yet it holds a high insightful rating now. I figure that is because I don't hold the view that illegal substances should be legalized.
No, I'm sorry. I don't see dope smoking as a victimless crime. Society is a victim. Self is a victim.
:-)
Same goes for tobacco use. Sure, it is not a crime because it had been a staple of our society for so long. However, municipalities et al. are doing what they can to restrict its consumption such that they can eradicate its use. They want it to be a crime. Why? Because the society costs are so high in terms of health expenses, etc.
Personally, I like the idea of returning felony to its original meaning.